Discuss the Politics, Economics, and Events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben, Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties)

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

About pystew

Retired Teacher, political science geek, village trustee. I lean a little left, but like a good political discussion. My blog, the New NY 23rd (http://newny23rd) is about discussing the issues facing the people of our new congressional district. Let's hear all sides of the issues, not just what the candidates want us to hear.

3 Responses to Video and Transcript of the Reed vs Robertson Debate

In a psychology class I took, the professor told us to concentrate on getting to know the person next to us – there would be a test on what we had learned. After about three minutes of chatting, the professor picked up a book, slammed it on his desk, making a very loud bang. After a second, he asked “What do you remember about your classmate?” We remembered nothing about our classmates – we remembered that ear splitting bang.
Clearly, the Reed plants in the debate audience were a planned “book on the desk” as they jeered the exposure one part of Reed’s voting records – that of his disrespect for women’s rights.

It appeared that Reed’s strategy was to limit the size of the hall and seating and cram their supporters up against the door two hours before so as to limit the number of Robertson supporters. Not only did Reed poo-poo his votes on issues directly affecting women by simply pointing out that he has 8 sisters whom he supports and in general he supports women–of course he voted against the violence against women act; minimum wage which impacts 2/3 of low-income working women and every measure in the ACA which affect women such as free contraceptives.

Every time Robertson gave him the opportunity to explain his vote he side-stepped the issue–he falsely claims that SS and Medicare will be bankrupt by 2033 –in actuality as Robertson pointed out it will still be able to payout 85% of benefits in 2033–that gives 18 years to fix the problem. For Social Security that can easily be fixed by raising the cap set at $117,000 so that millionaires pay more in proportion to their income Reed clearly is not interested in fixing the problem as he voted time and again for the Ryan budget which would start to privatize Medicare with a voucher system and limit benefits in Social Security. On minimum wage Reed referred to it as a starter wage–unfortunately too many people working at Wal-Mart and other locations are trying to support families on that starter wage which is below the poverty level.

On energy he supports an all-above strategy (he did not define what he meant) which of course includes fracking and gas storage–he again poo-pooed renewable energy as a strategy and of course he has voted against all EPA regulations of the gas industry, and supported several bills to limit the ability of federal agencies to monitor global warming and climate change–as if rising sea levels that now with high tides wash over parts of Norfolk, VA and Miami, FL. The DOD views climate change as a national security issue–Reed denies it is relevant.

Reed has his head in the sand and votes like the GOP puppet he is (he votes 92% with GOP leadership and abstains 4%–where is the reaching across the aisle?)–we need someone who has proven leadership capacity and has shown she can work with Republicans and find ways to still do the right thing by her constituents–that’s why I’m supporting Martha Robertson for Congress–

Good points, James.
The laughter from Tom’s extended family, friends, and fans about Martha even bringing up the War On Women tells the women who Tom supposedly represents a lot about him. The Video of Martha being heckled when she brought up Women’s issues is all over the internet–the Cornell Blog had it, the C-Span focused on it. If people remember anything about the debate, it is that rousing laughter by “Team Reed”, and Tom’s response about his mother and sisters, and his denouncing it as “political rhetoric”.